In a crucial decision for gun control advocates, the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld Maryland’s handgun licensing requirements. This ruling comes despite a 2022 U.S. Supreme Court decision that broadened gun rights, affirming the state’s stringent measures for firearm acquisition.
Maryland’s Licensing Law Under Scrutiny
The appeals court’s decision on Friday reversed a previous 2-1 ruling from a panel that deemed Maryland’s 2013 handgun licensing law unconstitutional. This law, part of the Firearm Safety Act of 2013, was enacted following the tragic Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in 2012.
Key Aspects of Maryland’s Firearm Safety Act
- Background Checks: Prospective handgun buyers must undergo comprehensive background checks, including fingerprinting.
- Safety Training: Applicants are required to complete a four-hour safety training course.
- Processing Time: After meeting these requirements, buyers face a waiting period of up to 30 days before completing their purchase.
Appeals Court Ruling
The full 4th Circuit Court’s decision confirms the validity of Maryland’s law. This ruling came after a November panel found the law unconstitutional based on the Supreme Court’s 2022 decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v Bruen. That ruling mandated that modern gun regulations must align with historical traditions of firearm control.
Court’s Majority Opinion
- Presumptive Constitutionality: Judge Barbara Milano Keenan highlighted that “shall-issue” licensing laws, like Maryland’s, are generally deemed constitutional. These laws require that if an individual meets statutory requirements, they must be issued a permit.
- Historical Consistency: The court acknowledged that despite some delays in the licensing process, such measures are designed to ensure that individuals exercising their Second Amendment rights are law-abiding.
Impact of the Supreme Court’s 2022 Ruling
The Supreme Court’s decision in Bruen has influenced how lower courts interpret firearm regulations. This ruling emphasised that modern laws should reflect the historical context of firearm regulations. However, the 4th Circuit’s decision clarifies that certain licensing regimes, which do not grant discretionary power to deny permits, align with this standard.
Reaction from Gun Rights Advocates
The National Rifle Association (NRA), which supported the lawsuit and funded the legal challenge, has not yet responded to the ruling. The NRA’s involvement underscores the ongoing debate over the balance between gun rights and regulatory measures.
Gun Rights and Licensing Laws
- Shall-Issue Laws: Over 40 states have shall-issue licensing laws, which mandate that permits must be issued to those who meet statutory criteria.
- Public Safety Concerns: Proponents argue that such laws ensure that only responsible individuals can obtain firearms, thereby enhancing public safety.
Conclusion: Upholding Maryland’s Gun Control Measures
The 4th Circuit’s ruling reaffirms the constitutionality of Maryland’s handgun licensing law, despite broader Supreme Court rulings on gun rights. This decision represents a significant moment in the ongoing debate over firearm regulation in the United States.
“The court’s decision reinforces the validity of well-established gun control measures,” said legal experts, emphasising the balance between Second Amendment rights and public safety.
Explore More:
